Organic Food / Corporate Ownership

Cornucopia Institute, an organic food thinktank, links to a chart of corporate ownership of major (American) organic food producers. Some of these brands (Celestial Seasonings, Rice Dream, Ben & Jerry's, Kellogg's) are also available in Finland; you'll get a nice view of who owns what in this growing industry.

• Industry structure in 2002
• Industry structure in 2006
  

The trend towards consolidation is quite clear.

The chart is developed by Dr Phil Howard, a professor at Michigan State University.

Cornucopia Institute's blog is here.

"Al Gore's carbon offsets may be an example for Big Three to follow"

The Wall Street Journal (28 March 2007) discusses a possible strategic alternative for Big Three, the US automakers: like Al Gore, carmakers could purchase carbon offsets to offset the CO2 emissions of passenger cars, perhaps even in lieu of making their cars more fuel efficient.

Nascent "carbon marketplaces hold the secret ingredients that has led many big companies - including the automakers - to come out favoring regulation of greenhouse-gas emissions," the WSJ writes. "The auto makers hate the current U.S. regulatory regime - Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards."

What if carmakers start buying offsets instead of reducing actual source emissions? This is, indeed, the greatest risk of the offset schemes: that companies and individuals buy good conscience while continuing to emit at the same rate or at increasing rates. How is the net outcome going to look?

Even Economist.com, a fervent proponent of markets, argues there are major problems.

"Calculating one's carbon output, and the carbon savings from various offsets, is very tricky and may be manipulated by unscrupulous offset firms. Trees take quite a long time to get to the stage where they are actually absorbing all that carbon—and tend to die shortly thereafter, releasing all that carbon back into the atmosphere, there to wreak havoc. By legitimating carbon usage, offset companies may actually be increasing it."

"Huge numbers of people in the rich world have to fly less, drive less, consume less, and live in smaller houses. If Mr Gore really wants to encourage this (as I do), then it would be nice to see him setting an example."

EU seeks to fight climate change with taxes

The Commission will on 28 March present ideas for “green taxes” to save energy and cut greenhouse gas emissions. It says that such an ‘ecological tax reform’ could increase the bloc’s competitiveness by shifting the burden away from labour taxes.

EU heads of state and government, meeting in Brussels on 8-9 March 2007, committed themselves to reducing European CO2 emissions by 20% by 2020 compared with 1990 levels – a bold promise, when one considers that Europe is already struggling to meet its current target, under the Kyoto Protocol, of cutting these emissions by 8% by 2012.

Currently, the EU’s principal tool to reduce emissions is its carbon trading scheme, but the EU will have to find new ways to discourage pollution if it is to reach its ambitious goal. Taxation could provide an answer as it can be used to orient producers’ and consumers’ behaviours to non-environmentally friendly goods.

From http://www.planet2025news.net/ntext.rxml?id=4261&photo=

Member states urged to take action on 'e-waste'

Consumer electronic manufacturers including Sony, Nokia and HP, and NGOs ranging from Greenpeace to Friends of the Earth, have called on the Commission to take action against 11 member states that have transposed the WEEE directive without making producers fully responsible for the recycling of electrical and electronic products.

The Directive on Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) aims to increase the reuse, recycling and recovery of waste from a variety of consumer products ranging from light bulbs to PCs. Electrical equipment is one of the fastest- growing waste streams in the EU.
The Directive aims to create incentives for producers to take the initiative to improve the design of their products and make them easier to recycle.

From http://www.euractiv.com/en/environment/member-states-urged-take-action-waste/article-162349


Snack-maker aims for green consumers with carbon labels
By Fiona Harvey,Environment Correspondent, Financial Times

Packets of Walkers crisps will appear on the shelves today carrying the world's first "carbon labels", enabling customers to gauge the effect of their buying habits on the climate.
The labels will show that 75g of carbon dioxide are emitted to produce and transport 34.5g of Walkers crisps "from seed to store".

Tom Delay, chief executive of the Carbon Trust, thegovernment-funded body that helped to develop the labels, said: "This will be a driver for businesses starting to compete on their carbon footprint as much as on price."

The carbon labels come as companies try to impress their green credentials on environmentally conscious customers. Walkers has been working with the trust for five years and other -companies, including Boots, the retailer, are expectedto launch similar labels soon.
Innocent, the maker of smoothies and fruit juices, will include information on the "carbon footprint" of its products on its website initially, although in the future these could appear on the juice packaging.

Marks and Spencer said yesterday it was also working with the trust on carbon labels for some product lines. Separate from the Carbon Trust's work, Tesco announced earlier this year it would put carbon labels on all of its products, although this could take several years.
Mr Delay said the idea was likely to be adopted more widely: "This is a little beginning to something that could be very big." He said the labels would explain to consumers the CO2emitted from the products, which would enable people trying to buy ethically to choose between different products.

Ben & Jerry's, the ice-cream brand, welcomed the initiative but said it would not put carbon labels on its products until an international standard had been set.
Fiona Dawson, chair of the Food and Drink Federation's sustainability and competitiveness steering group, said: "A single methodology for industry as a whole is essential. This is a complex issue. To be effective, the methodology must be practicable, based upon sound science and easily understood."

Coca-Cola's ethics put to the test in European-wide study

Coca-Cola's performance as an ethically conscious global brand has come under scrutiny in a 15 nation, European-wide study into the soft drinks giant's involvement in social causes and environmental responsibility.

Over two-thirds of respondents questioned whether the company makes a positive contribution to society.The study, which was commissioned by Vlerick Leuven Ghent Management School in Belgium, looked at the Socially Responsible Trading performance of Coca-Cola across 15 major European markets and eight separate consumer groups.

According to the report, more than 40% of respondents felt Coca-Cola was not making a positive contribution to society, with over-three quarters of those polled stating they were prepared to pay more for ethically produced goods.

Additionally, 86% of people surveyed said companies should speak about their charitable work, but a proportion of respondents said "virtue is its own reward".

However, the report warned that brands must be seen to be engaging in social and environmental programmes to remain successful.T

From http://www.planet2025news.net/ntext.rxml?cust=1001&id=4306&url=http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/645693/Coca-Colas-ethics-put-test-European-wide-study/&photo=

Dr Bowers' Lectures; "The Smartest Guys in the Room"

Helen Bowers, a finance professor from the University of Delaware, is teaching a five-day short course on corporate governance at Hanken this week. We started yesterday, and actually ended by watching The Corporation, which the CSR course and Net Impact showed in Casa back in January. Corporate governance, Dr Bowers said, is about how to solve a lot of the issues that cause CSR problems. Her lecture schedule is on the sidebar right here.

On Thursday (rm 305 at 16:15) there'll be a showing of The Smartest Guys in the Room, a 2005 movie about one of the biggest business scandals in American history -- the collapse of Enron. If you're interested, you know how to get there!

Permaculture: From Observation to Application of Nature's Patterns

Permaculture is a lifestyle ethic and a design system that is based on sustainability concepts and nature's patterns. According to the permaculture philosophy, food production, community design and land use could be reorganized based on ecological design. Some researchers have found that many pre-Colombian peoples in the Amazon basin emulated natural design in their communities.

What does permaculture mean? Specific examples could include maximizing the use of trees and perennial plants; using chickens in weed control; and making sure that agricultural workers are treated fairly. A basic question that permaculturists might want to answer is, How can we profit from our land resources in ways that keep that land productive -- and how do we do it without exploiting people?

From Australia to the United States, local citizen groups concerned about resource dependency and environmental degradation are making a concerted effort to undo and redo current consumption and living patterns.

Where does CSR fit into the picture? Permaculture has spawned a monster of a word, "ecologinomic", to represent ecology-economic ethics in land use. Perhaps systems ecology and sustainable living philosophies could rub off on corporations going forward, particularly on agricultural and chemical giants that have been accused of dubious business practices in recent years.

Diamonds Are Forever

In response to Johanna's post Tuesday, here's Kanye West addressing the same issue.

Report urges US government to curb television violence

The American media regulator FCC has published a report suggesting ways in which the US congress could craft a law against (excessive) violence on television.

Psychological research suggests that children who watch violent TV material become more aggressive and less sensitive to other people's pain. What about adults?

The new report, which is of interest to American broadcasting corporations and production companies, suggests ways to curb television violence -- ways in which the first amendment ("free speech", thus far used to defend media companies) won't be violated.

Wal-Mart Class Action Suit

According to Helsingin Sanomat, Wal-Mart faces a class action suit for gender discrimination. An American court accepted on Tuesday a historical suit involving millions of women who have worked for Wal-Mart after 1998. The suit alleges that Wal-Mart paid women lower wages and limited women's opportunities to advance into managerial positions.

In the clip, the CEO of Wal-Mart talks about sustainability issues at Wal-Mart. The interviewer is Charlie Rose, who doesn't exactly take a stand but leaves it up to the viewer to make up their own mind. More Charlie Rose interviews here; some of us know him as one of the most well regarded US talkshow hosts (he works for PBS, the Public Broadcasting Service.) GoogleVideo offers hour-long interviews with Al Gore, Noam Chomsky, artist Shirin Neshat (whose photos were up at EMMA in Espoo last fall!) and others on issues like climate change, alternative energy and human rights.



Here "High Cost of Low Price" producer-director Robert Greenwald and a Wal-Mart representative talk about the firm's labor practices.

WAL-MART: The High Cost of Low Price - Movie Night

Time for another movie event. Tomorrow (Wed) night in Casa at 18.00. A documentary about American superstore Wal-Mart will be shown.

Conservative Thinktank Offers Cash to Scientists

The Guardian reports that a conservative thinktank has offered $10,000 each to scientists and economists for disputing climate change.

The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) is funded by oil giant ExxonMobil, whose ex-CEO is the vice chairman of the thinktank's board of trustees. According to the Guardian, the thinktank also has close ties to the Bush administration.

AEI sent letters to the science community offering payments for articles that emphasize the shortcomings of the IPCC report.

World Still Warming; Pageant Candidates Shedding Layers

In continuation of yesterday's entry, two things.

First, New York Times readers respond to the IPCC report on the newspaper's blog. Andrew Revkin, science journalist, readies to answer reader questions; you can still ask some and post your opinions. In the main article today, Revkin is interviewed in a podcast. Revkin is asked, "Should people think about changing where they live at this point?" He responds, with the New York area readership in mind, "Well, the timescales are such that" it isn't necessary right now. Revkin knows what he's talking about: he's one of the most read and respected popular science writers in the US. "And if you're wealthy enough" you can adjust later, he notes matter-of-factly.

He knows it all too well: most of the worst-affected regions are or will be those low-lying areas of the world that are extremely poor. What can a Bangladeshi family do?

When asked about how he feels about the future, Revkin says that he "goes to bed" a pessimist, but "wakes up" an optimist.

Elsewhere in the New York Times today, a columnist wonders if the IPCC report isn't in fact too optimistic. Climate science is advancing fast and we do not really understand the impact of melting glaciers or inland ice sheets. They weren't included in the IPCC measurements.

In the UK, the Guardian notes that "the scientists spoke cautiously, but the graphs said it all."

A tipping-point of public awareness was being reached. The time for talking, as the politicians kept saying yesterday, was over. Now it was time for action.

Although in saying this they were, of course, still just talking.

---

On a completely different note, in a not-so-unexpected turn of events, "public outrage" over the controversial catsuits of the pageant candidates forced the tour organizer to revert back to half nakedness.

You cannot but wonder about the intentions and purpose of some publications, tabloid or otherwise. First of all, on a day when the IPCC report comes out (it would make awesome headlines, guaranteed!), climate change in some of the most widely circulated newspapers is largely left out.

Second, the phrasing and wording in these articles about the Miss Finland pageant... Pageants have often been criticized for being demeaning meat markets. There are certainly interest groups out there that would gladly leave it so and continue business as usual.

Readers aren't dumb.

The tour organizer wants to keep the pageant classy, despite pressure to use the scantily clad young women as bait at various consumer functions. While parading on stage wearing next to nothing, the young women are subjected to a leering, staring public. The public are wearing down jackets, by the way. The organizer doesn't want to take that kind of advantage, so she comes up with new ideas. Some of the events take place in the evening, in dimly lit clubs or restaurants. (How many of us would go to Kaivohuone wearing only underwear? Right.)

To protect the women, the tour organizer has a brilliant idea: nobody defined what kind of underwear the women should wear! So she arranges for them to wear full body catsuits, which is categorized as lingerie.

That, however, isn't enough: an anonymous "public" demands a return to what "we" had before. Why do I think the "public" actually stands for the "media"?

The interesting thing is, the only citation or statement in Iltalehti's article comes from the representative of the lingerie company. Certainly not an example of investigative journalism.

What's more, the wording on the matter suggests that the pageant candidates do this quite willingly, leaving just enough room for doubt in the mind of some readers, I'm sure, that this whole scheme isn't exploitative at all. Who knows, maybe they really want to walk around in their underwear in a car center.

I'm still wondering if the women get paid for this or if they ought to be categorized as unpaid interns or temporary workers.

Missit paljastelivat MIESYLEISÖLLE

2.2.2007 23:58

Mitään ei jäänyt arvailujen varaan, kun missifinalistit esiintyivät alusasuissa. Miss Suomi -kilpailujen finalistit esittelivät rohkeaa alusasumuotia eilen Autotalo Pelttarissa Huittisissa. Autoliikkeeseen oli kerääntynyt valtavasti etenkin keski-ikäisiä miehiä, joille missit tarjosivat aimo annoksen silmänruokaa.

Yleisön kommentit muotishowsta olivat tyrmääviä, joten Miss Suomi -kiertueesta vastaava mallimamma Marjo Sjöroos joutui taipumaan vaatimusten edessä: missit laitettiin jälleen paljastaviin alusasuihin.

- Näin jatketaan päivänäytöksissä. Iltaisin misseillä pysyy trikoot alusasujen alla, vaikka minua heitettäisiin kananmunilla päähän. En halua, että humalaiset miehet koskettelevat missejä iltanäytöksissä, Marjo Sjöroos totesi.

All of this reminds me of an experience a year or two ago. JCDecaux, the French multinational billboard corporation put up a lingerie campaign that brought on huge criticism in Scandinavia. The campaign featured a headless torso of a woman, with the text "I like boobs" on it.

I mean, on her.

Always easier to objectify when you cut someone's head off. Now that's class.

At that time, I called the clothes manufacturer (no response there) and the local Helsinki transportation authority to express my disapproval as a consumer of transportation services. "It's annoying," I said.

The HKL PR person was very sympathetic, but she said there is nothing she or HKL could do. I was surprised. "You guys own the bus stops, though, don't you?" I asked. "What do you mean there's nothing you can do?" I thought it sounded kind of odd: they are Helsinki bus and tram stops and this is the Helsinki transportation authority, so how come?

"What do you mean you can't control what posters people put up?" I asked. She said that they are indeed HKL bus and tram stops, but as far as advertising goes, it isn't that simple. JCDecaux, the corporation, has bought or leased the advertising space and the company decides what kind of advertising to put up. JCDecaux, the overseas corporation, decides who greets you at the bus stop: a milk carton, a mascara or perhaps a pair of mammaries. The corporation is in charge of what our living environment looks like, because they have bought that space.

The lady at HKL engaged in a good and spirited half-hour conversation with me. It was good fun and she was sympathetic, but she apologized for not being able to do much else.

---

Some thoughts from a former Miss Finland here.

Yksi Miss Suomen keskeisistä tehtävistä on toimia esikuvana tytöille. Millä tavalla Miss Suomi on parempi esimerkki tytöille kuin esimerkiksi Naisasialiiton aktiivit?

- Missi on neutraalimpi esikuva nuorille tytöille kuin naisasialiiton aktiivit. Heillä on paljon enemmän negatiivisia asioita, joita he yrittävät tyrkyttää nuorille tytöille, kun ajavat vain naisten asioita.

- Naisasialiiton aktiivit nostavat esiin paljon huonoja juttuja, jotta he voisivat edistää heidän omaa"hyväänsä". Missin rooli on loppujen lopuksi yhteiskunnallisesti aika pieni. Hän on kaunis ja saa jotain kivoja liitetöitä, mutta ei ole poliittisesti vaikuttava, eikä kannusta teinityttöjä tietyn ideologian alle. Sen vuoksi missiin on turvallisempi samaistua kuin jonkin järjestön edustajaan.

It's always interesting to see someone take an institution and assume it is value neutral just because that institution doesn't talk about its politics.

Microsoft - Best Corporate Image?

Microsoft has the best public image among largest corporations, according to a new survey ranking the 60 highest profile companies in the world. The Wall Street Journal (31.1.07) says that much of this is due to the social responsibility record of Bill and Melinda Gates. The public doesn't separate between Microsoft and the Gates's foundation: the foundation's philantropic efforts shine on Microsoft. The article notes that in general, social responsibility is becoming an increasingly important component of corporation reputation.

Placing in the top 1-10 spots were Microsoft, Johnson & Johnson, 3M, Google, Coca-Cola, General Mills, United Parcel Service, Sony, Toyota Motor, and Procter & Gamble.

In the lowest positions at 51-60 were Allstate, BP, Chevron, Sprint, Ford Motor, Altria Group, General Motors, Comcast, Exxon Mobil and finally Halliburton.

Exxon Mobil Tries to Clean Up Its Act

A half-page article in the FT yesterday notes that Exxon Mobil (#59 on the corporate image list) finds itself cornered. Known for its overt opposition to the Kyoto protocol, the oil giant is slowly shifting its position and showing signs of joining the scientific mainstream. "We need to be clear that in questioning whether Kyoto is the right approach to climate policy is not and should not be synonymous with being a climate sceptic," Exxon's VP for safety, health and environment is quoted as saying. Does that mean a tide is turning?

IPCC Climate Report Out

The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) climate summary and full report will be released today. Taloussanomat reports that the report's tone is stark. "We are cooking ourselves." Taloussanomat also links to an article about what changed Ollila's mind about climate change. The Daily Telegraph has gotten wind of the final version of the report, which gives actual numbers on the expected levels of warming.

What seems curious is that certain newspapers are still focusing on reporting whether or not the change is human induced (the report says there is 90% certainty that it is.) I thought we already basically settled that debate enough to do something. With that in mind, the quote of the day seems fitting:

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Saving Other Species

Tigers, cod and the orang-utan. The Guardian suggests ways to help animals on the verge of extinction. The focus is on the UK market, but who's to say we couldn't take the same action in Helsinki?

One

Bank of America celebrated its merger with credit card company MBNA in Manhattan late last year. To enjoy a video from what is presumably their closing event, click on the arrow below.

Before watching the clip, you might want to check out "The ONE Campaign" at one.org, led by U2's frontman Bono and named after the original song. The ONE Campaign is actually a charity effort to fight AIDS, starvation and extreme poverty.



ps. Bono is also involved in the corporate world through a stake in Elevation Partners, a venture capital business. I don't know how that is connected to this, but it just came to mind. In the name of fairness, transparency, and shades of gray.

"Most Sustainable Companies" List

In Davos, a niche consulting firm launched the first annual 100 most sustainable corporations of the world ranking (they call it the "G100.") A copy can be found right here. The list includes two Finnish companies, Kesko and Nokia.

Companies "were evaluated according to how effectively they manage environmental, social and governance risks and opportunities, relative to their industry peers."

Chairman of Shell and Nokia on Climate Change; Traveling to Disappearing Destinations

Jorma Ollila, the chairman of the boards of Shell and Nokia, calls for strict emission controls, reports Helsingin Sanomat today. Ollila supports the EU carbon trading scheme and follows American energy policy closely. Doubling energy efficiency is the way to go, Ollila argues, shunning proposed increases in atomic energy. "Awareness of the threat of global warming was much higher than I expected," Ollila says in reference to the European oil and energy sector. Full Finnish-language article here.

For a wistful moment, check out the Guardian for a travel article called the "10 wonders of the vanishing world." Beautiful article, upsetting content, including the disappearing snows of Kilimanjaro, the disappearing snow in Austrian ski resorts and the disappearing Maldives islands. The most interesting bit is towards the end where the editor tackles the question "Should I go before it disappears?" Beyond that, should we start doing something else before they disappear?

Movie Event; Greenwashing; 'Fool' Efficiency

Yesterday's film event, The Corporation, had a great turnout. Thank you to the over fifty Hankeiters who attended and for the Student Union for supporting the event.

On to concepts. What is greenwashing all about? When companies want to appear as more ecofriendly (and one could also argue CSR oriented) than they really are, then they are "greenwashing." The Oxford English Dictionary defines the term as “disinformation disseminated by an organization so as to present an environmentally responsible public image.” The term is considered pejorative.

Some examples of companies allegedly involved in greenwashing include ExxonMobil (or Esso in Finland); the company is the subject of an article in the Guardian earlier this month. ExxonMobil has presented a very critical and conservative view of the role of carbon dioxide emissions in climate change. The company has now admitted it has a PR problem that needs to be dealt with. This, however, is not likely to result in strategic changes.

Other alleged greenwashers are listed in a short article about America's ten worst greenwashers.

Strategic change might, however, just pay off. Where companies are being washed green, perhaps they ought to just change, because the consequence of holding on to the status quo may not be so pretty. This is evident in the fate of one of the world's biggest brands and largest automakers, Ford Motor Co. Number one in the above greenwasher list, Ford is really struggling, having just announced its worst financial results ever: in fiscal 2006, Ford lost an average of $1,925 for every car or truck it sold, a total of 12.7 billion dollars. U.S. consumers have been shunning Ford vehicles, because they have the lowest fuel effiency levels in the market. With oil prices continually rising, the decline in demand is likely to continue. Unless Ford actually changes its strategy and begins to respond to consumer demands for more fuel-efficient vehicles, it is evident that it is placing its brand and financial future at risk.